Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: The ondemand CPUFreq code -- I hope the functionality stays | From | Arjan van de Ven <> | Date | Fri, 28 Jul 2006 11:24:04 +0200 |
| |
> Personally, I prefer conservative, because it isn't as "jumpy", but I > can see ondemand being necessary in a server environment where the > several second lag time to peak performance would hurt response time > when load is low.
jumpy is fine though; at least on the processors my employer makes changing frequency is really really fast, so you get maximum savings by switching often (you can switch down more aggressively if you know you'll switch back up quickly). So switching often is a good policy if you want both good response AND good power savings... I don't know about other cpu makers; my frequency switching machines are all Intel.
-- if you want to mail me at work (you don't), use arjan (at) linux.intel.com
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |